Walker v. Gomez.U.S. Appeals Court DISCRIMINATION Walker v. Gomez, 370 F.3d 969 (9th Cir. 2004). A Black state prisoner brought a suit under [section] 1983 against state defendants, claiming he was denied equal protection because, during three prison lockdowns Lockdown A specified period when an employee of a public company is barred from selling - and occasionally buying - their company's stock.Notes: These types of equity transaction restrictions can be imposed by securities regulators or underwriting firms if a company has recently issued public securities. They can also be self-imposed by a corporation as an impetus for employees to retain company stock., he was not allowed to resume his job until after similarly-situated inmates of other races. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of the defendants and the prisoner appealed. The appeals court affirmed in part, reversed in part and remanded. the court held that the prisoner was not required to prove discriminatory intent to establish that he was denied equal protection, where the defendants admitted that they used race as the only factor in preliminarily excluding Black inmates from critical-worker lists. The court found that the defendants were entitled to qualified immunity, but that qualified immunity did not preclude injunctive or declaratory relief. (Calipatria State Prison, California)
|
|
||||||||||||||||||||
Printer friendly
Cite/link
Email
Feedback
Reader Opinion